Tom Reese SJ - The Latin Mass
I've almost posted on this subject three times, and each time deleted it .... I'm not sure I have anything to say that hasn't already been said ... but then I saw that it was the subject of the latest question at On Faith, and I thought I'd see what some of those guys had to say. The question posed ... Pope Benedict is encouraging wider use of Latin Mass. What elements of tradition -- including language -- are essential for worship? ... and here below is the answer given by Thomas Reese SJ, former editor of America magazine and current fellow of the Woodstock Theological Center .....
***********************
Ita Missa Est
Ignoring one's past is ignoring one's roots. But repeating old prayers and doctrinal formulas without understanding them is not the way to respect tradition.
Any religious community with roots in the past has traditions. The challenge is to discern what is at the core of this tradition and what is peripheral.
Latin is a classic case of a peripheral issue. The Last Supper was not in Latin. For the first four centuries the Eucharist was celebrated in Greek. Why did the church switch from Greek to Latin? Because Latin was the language of the masses. This switch caused the first schism in Rome between the antipope traditionalist Hippolytus and the Latin modernizer Pope Calistus. Thus the true tradition of the church was to have the Eucharist in the language of the people so that they could understand and participate.
The real issue in Benedict XVI’s motu proprio is not Latin in the liturgy. Any priest can say the current Catholic liturgy in Latin. Nor is the issue the Tridentine or pre-Vatican II mass. Any priest, with the permission of his bishop, has been able to say the Tridentine Latin mass since 1984 when John Paul II issued his indult.
The real issue is the power of local bishop to decide whether the Tridentine mass will be said in his diocese. Under the indult of John Paul, the local bishop had the power to approve or not approve the use of the Tridentine mass in his diocese. Under that system, a priest or a group of people petitioned the bishop to allow them to use the Tridentine mass. He then investigated the situation and decided on pastoral grounds whether it was a good idea or not. He usually required the petitioners to state that they accepted the new liturgy and Vatican II as legitimate. Around 130 U.S. dioceses (about 70%), including most of the large ones, allowed the Tridentine mass under limited circumstances.
Some bishops, especially in France, said no because they judged that the petitioners rejected the reforms of Vatican II and were divisive in their dioceses. By allowing the use of the Tridentine mass without the local bishop’s permission, the pope is saying that he does not trust the pastoral judgment of the bishops. Those who have been fighting the bishops over the Tridentine mass are celebrating this as a victory over the bishops.
Some in the Vatican, including Benedict, hope that allowing free use of the Tridentine mass will make possible reunion with Society of St. Pius X, the schismatic group started by French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The leaders of the group, however, have indicated that their rejection of Vatican II goes way beyond the vernacular liturgy.
Others in the Vatican hope that greater use of the Tridentine mass will undermine support for the Lefebvrite leaders and bring some of the society’s members back into union with the Catholic Church. Time will tell.
Benedict does not think allowing freer use to the Tridentine mass will be divisive. Let’s hope he is right, but pity the poor pastor who has a half dozen people in his parish requesting the old rite. Most priests are saying two or three masses on Sunday already, and only a few elderly priests know how to say the old mass properly. Luckily, the support for the new liturgy among the Catholic laity is overwhelming.
Some Catholics support the Tridentine mass because they say it heightens the mystery of the Mass. The mystery of the Eucharist is not that it's in Latin. The mystery is the death and resurrection of Jesus that is being celebrated. To have the mysteriousness of Latin blocking people from seeing the true mystery is one of the reasons we went to English.
Some stories in the media expressed concern that the expansion of the use of the Tridentine by Benedict XVI would include the phrase "perfidious Jews" in the Good Friday liturgy. This is not the case since the 1962 version does not include this phrase. It is the 1962 missal that was approved for limited use by John Paul II in his 1984 indult and by Benedict in his motu proprio.
The treatment of the Jews in the 1962 missal is not ideal. It prayed for the "conversion of the Jews."
For the conversion of the Jews. Let us pray also for the Jews that the Lord our God may take the veil from their hearts and that they also may acknowledge our Lord Jesus Christ.
Let us pray: Almighty and everlasting God, You do not refuse Your mercy even to the Jews; hear the prayers which we offer for the blindness of that people so that they may acknowledge the light of Your truth, which is Christ, and be delivered from their darkness.
It also prays for "heretics and schismatics."
The 1970 missal of Paul VI, which is used today, says:
Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant.
Almighty and eternal God, long ago you gave your promise to Abraham and his posterity. Listen to your Church as we pray that the people you first made your own may arrive at the fullness of redemption. We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen.
The 1970 missal is far superior and in fact more traditional than the 1962 missal, which reflects the limited historical scholarship available in the time of Pius V. It is not perfect and needs improvement, but the Vatican changes that are coming down the pike are going to make matters worse not better.
For example, the Vatican is insisting that the English translation be changed to make it more literal (word for word). In the not distant future, the people will be told to respond "And with your spirit" to "The Lord be with you" rather than "And also with you." This and other changes in the people's responses is going to cause chaos in parishes. The English-speaking bishops fought this for a long time, but finally gave in. Pity the pastor who is going to have to explain this to his people, especially when he thinks it is a stupid idea.
Posted by Thomas J. Reese, S.J. on July 11, 2007 9:27 AM
***************************************
***********************
Ita Missa Est
Ignoring one's past is ignoring one's roots. But repeating old prayers and doctrinal formulas without understanding them is not the way to respect tradition.
Any religious community with roots in the past has traditions. The challenge is to discern what is at the core of this tradition and what is peripheral.
Latin is a classic case of a peripheral issue. The Last Supper was not in Latin. For the first four centuries the Eucharist was celebrated in Greek. Why did the church switch from Greek to Latin? Because Latin was the language of the masses. This switch caused the first schism in Rome between the antipope traditionalist Hippolytus and the Latin modernizer Pope Calistus. Thus the true tradition of the church was to have the Eucharist in the language of the people so that they could understand and participate.
The real issue in Benedict XVI’s motu proprio is not Latin in the liturgy. Any priest can say the current Catholic liturgy in Latin. Nor is the issue the Tridentine or pre-Vatican II mass. Any priest, with the permission of his bishop, has been able to say the Tridentine Latin mass since 1984 when John Paul II issued his indult.
The real issue is the power of local bishop to decide whether the Tridentine mass will be said in his diocese. Under the indult of John Paul, the local bishop had the power to approve or not approve the use of the Tridentine mass in his diocese. Under that system, a priest or a group of people petitioned the bishop to allow them to use the Tridentine mass. He then investigated the situation and decided on pastoral grounds whether it was a good idea or not. He usually required the petitioners to state that they accepted the new liturgy and Vatican II as legitimate. Around 130 U.S. dioceses (about 70%), including most of the large ones, allowed the Tridentine mass under limited circumstances.
Some bishops, especially in France, said no because they judged that the petitioners rejected the reforms of Vatican II and were divisive in their dioceses. By allowing the use of the Tridentine mass without the local bishop’s permission, the pope is saying that he does not trust the pastoral judgment of the bishops. Those who have been fighting the bishops over the Tridentine mass are celebrating this as a victory over the bishops.
Some in the Vatican, including Benedict, hope that allowing free use of the Tridentine mass will make possible reunion with Society of St. Pius X, the schismatic group started by French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The leaders of the group, however, have indicated that their rejection of Vatican II goes way beyond the vernacular liturgy.
Others in the Vatican hope that greater use of the Tridentine mass will undermine support for the Lefebvrite leaders and bring some of the society’s members back into union with the Catholic Church. Time will tell.
Benedict does not think allowing freer use to the Tridentine mass will be divisive. Let’s hope he is right, but pity the poor pastor who has a half dozen people in his parish requesting the old rite. Most priests are saying two or three masses on Sunday already, and only a few elderly priests know how to say the old mass properly. Luckily, the support for the new liturgy among the Catholic laity is overwhelming.
Some Catholics support the Tridentine mass because they say it heightens the mystery of the Mass. The mystery of the Eucharist is not that it's in Latin. The mystery is the death and resurrection of Jesus that is being celebrated. To have the mysteriousness of Latin blocking people from seeing the true mystery is one of the reasons we went to English.
Some stories in the media expressed concern that the expansion of the use of the Tridentine by Benedict XVI would include the phrase "perfidious Jews" in the Good Friday liturgy. This is not the case since the 1962 version does not include this phrase. It is the 1962 missal that was approved for limited use by John Paul II in his 1984 indult and by Benedict in his motu proprio.
The treatment of the Jews in the 1962 missal is not ideal. It prayed for the "conversion of the Jews."
For the conversion of the Jews. Let us pray also for the Jews that the Lord our God may take the veil from their hearts and that they also may acknowledge our Lord Jesus Christ.
Let us pray: Almighty and everlasting God, You do not refuse Your mercy even to the Jews; hear the prayers which we offer for the blindness of that people so that they may acknowledge the light of Your truth, which is Christ, and be delivered from their darkness.
It also prays for "heretics and schismatics."
The 1970 missal of Paul VI, which is used today, says:
Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant.
Almighty and eternal God, long ago you gave your promise to Abraham and his posterity. Listen to your Church as we pray that the people you first made your own may arrive at the fullness of redemption. We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen.
The 1970 missal is far superior and in fact more traditional than the 1962 missal, which reflects the limited historical scholarship available in the time of Pius V. It is not perfect and needs improvement, but the Vatican changes that are coming down the pike are going to make matters worse not better.
For example, the Vatican is insisting that the English translation be changed to make it more literal (word for word). In the not distant future, the people will be told to respond "And with your spirit" to "The Lord be with you" rather than "And also with you." This and other changes in the people's responses is going to cause chaos in parishes. The English-speaking bishops fought this for a long time, but finally gave in. Pity the pastor who is going to have to explain this to his people, especially when he thinks it is a stupid idea.
Posted by Thomas J. Reese, S.J. on July 11, 2007 9:27 AM
***************************************
posted by crystal | 11:45 AM
28 Comments:
Thank you for posting this Crystal and I hope you don't delete it. It is a very good summary of what has been done, what is being done and the difficulties that surround the choices Benedict has been making.
I've been wanting to do something on this for a few weeks now but just haven't had the patience to deal with it. I'm glad you have. Now I don't have to. ;-)
Ha - all you care about is camping.
I haven't been camping for a while but the last place I went was Sequoia National Park. The Crystal Cave is there, no relation :-)
Hahaha! You can't really blame me though can you? Sequoia is gorgeous!
We've got a really nice National Park just a few hours to the north of us;
Prince Albert National Park
But Teamouse is afraid of bears. ;-)
Prince Albert Park is beautiful too! I've never seen a bear but on one camping trip to Mendecino we did encounter a rather uppity wild pig :-)
I dont really understand a lot of what this is about...but I have noticed that there seem to be a lot of traditionalist Roman Catholics out there who believe that the Vatican II mass is heretical and that the mass should only be in Latin...
I dont really understand to tell the truth, but on the Latin issue, I think that the language of the mass should be in the language of the people. Understanding is essential to participation, that is essential to the growth of the church. In my opinion anyway :)
also, out of interest, we (well, the Orthodox) already say "and to your Spirit" in the Divine Liturgy, but I dont see anything wrong with "and also with you"
again, I dont really understand all of this
God Bless
love Rachel xoxo
I always have liked Fr Reese's view on things; thanks for sharing it.
I've been thinking about posting something on this subject, and have some thoughts in mind but not enough time to get it done(!)
Have a wonderful day Crystal...
Hi Rachel,
Yes, some traditionalists really seem to hate Vatican II, but I think the reforms were great.
Steve, Hi :-). I'd be interested to read what you have to say on the subject.
Hi Crystal,
This is a good post, and those are good comments by Fr. Reese.
Sorry I haven't been by lately. I've been involved with a lot of other people on a very lengthy (over 100 comments) discussion of this topic here.
Hi Jeff,
wow - that's some discussion. Is that the "other" Liam who called you hysterical? I thought it was until he mentioned Canute, and then I started to wonder :-)
I used to visit Joe's blog all the time ... don't know why I stopped, but I'll start dropping by again.
The "other" Liam? Ah, he's alright. I thought the two Liams were one and the same for a while, but once I got to know them both.. yeah, I could see the difference. :-)
This is a good post, Crystal. I think Father Reese always explains things clearly and well. He does hit a lot of problems on the head -- the situation of parish priests and the taking away of pastoral discretion from the bishops.
I personally don't see a problem with the use of Latin for those who prefer it -- it is true that the real mystery is the Eucharist itself, but there is something to be said in having a special liturgical language that sets it apart from our day-to-day speech. Latin would be appropriate for the Roman Church, just as Aramaic is for the Syrian Church or Coptic is for the Egyptians. I still prefer the vernacular liturgy myself, but I understand the attraction of the Latin Mass.
Of course, people who do attend a Latin Mass should know Latin -- at least enough to follow a missal with translation. A priest whispering in Latin and a uncomprehending congregation praying the rosaries does not seem to me to be much of a communal celebration.
PS I saw a bear once near Lake Tahoe. The closest thing to camping I do now is the occasional walk through Central Park.
This is a good post, and it sums up a lot of the issues I've been having surrounding the matter, as well. In the end I hope it'll be a non-issue for many people, but I worry about smaller parishes being torn apart by this.
I'm confused. On one hand, Pope Benedict made all those little Indian people angry in South America. Now he wants to offer a Latin Mass?!?!? Hasn't he been watching Lou Dobbs?!?!? You watch, next thing you know, little Mexican kids will be taking jobs from our poor white altar boys!
Hey, Liam, I thought you were coming out to Long Island to do some suburban camping. I mean, the kid's gonna have to use a sleeping bag - that counts for something, doesn't it?
And we have some pretty ferocious raccoons out here.
Don't underestimate the wild savegery of Long Island. It makes Central Park look a shopping mall.
Forgive my silly attempts at humor - this was a very good post, Crystal.
Liam,
are there ever Masses celebrated in Greek? I've never heard a Latin Mass - I'd like to,. I wouldn't understand it but I think it would sound kind of cool. Maybe Benedict thinks that all the parisheners don't know Latin, so we won't notice the anti-Jewish prayers ... sort of like that objectionable part in The Passion of the Christ that was in Aramaic without subtitles. Hey, that's an idea ... Latin Mass with sub-titles :-)
Hi Garpu, thanks for visiting.
William, I've only heard bad things about Long Island, all from episodes of Law and Order, where it's the homicide detectives' nightmare to be sent there to work because it's so boring. No racoons were mentioned.
I think (though I'm not sure) that Byzantine Rite Masses are in Greek. And of course Greek Orthodox Masses. When I lived in Italy, one weekend I went to the Monastery of San Nilo in Grottaferrata, to the south of Rome. It's a Greek monastery dating from before 1054, and they're Catholic, but do the Mass in Greek.
I don't know why I think it would be beautiful in Greek even more than Latin.
You've been so many places, Liam (except Bari, of course :-) Maybe you would post about some of your travels?
"Of course, people who do attend a Latin Mass should know Latin -- at least enough to follow a missal with translation."
That's the problem though isn't it? We (those in ministry) have been taught to discourage the use of missals of any kind by laity during the Mass. The Word is meant to be proclaimed and actively listened to, the Eucharist is to be actively prayed by all present. No parts are meant to be individually read at the time of celebration, regardless of which language it is being celebrated in.
It looks like I am with the majority here in that, I do not have much of a problem with the Latin version of the Mass per se. The difficulty as I see it is underlined nicely by the article you quoted Crystal, that the Mystery of the Eucharist is one of Presence and not of language. My concern is that wider use of the 'mystery' of Latin will over shadow the deeper and more important Mystery of the Eucharist heralding a return to a view of much more superstitious, fear oriented point of view towards the Mass.
A second, and much more serious problem is in the direct undermining of Episcopal authority by Rome in allowing even the perception that congregations can determine their mode of liturgical worship outside of their local Shepherd. All though the letter that went out to Bishops tried to calm their fears by saying that they have final say, it was steeped in loosely veiled threats of Pontifical intervention should any Bishop be unable to resolve a Latin Mass related issue in their diocese. In a nutshell they are told that Rome hopes they do not have to step in and resolve and congregation's request to celebrate the Latin Mass. Kind of cuts them off at the knees and slices a hole through the whole 'Pope as First Among Equals' definition of the Papacy.
On a side note, the trip was GREAT and bear free! A fabulous weekend. I'll have to post some pics both of the park itself and our amazing prairie countryside.
Cura, thanks for the comment. It seems like all the commenters, especially you, have a much better grasp of the issue than me ... all the comments have been really informative.
Camping photos! :-)
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I have a feeling that someone is trying to get some free advertizing out of our blogs. ;o)
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Cura, I think you're right :-)
Post a Comment
<< Home